Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Catholic Religion Proved By The Protestant Bible
OLRL ^

Posted on 08/24/2007 9:45:54 AM PDT by NYer

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-111 next last
To: Religion Moderator
Discuss the issues all you want, but don’t make it personal

OK...Didn't realize I crossed over the line...

61 posted on 08/24/2007 11:14:31 PM PDT by Iscool (OK, I'm Back...Now what were your other two wishes???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: irishtenor; NYer
Are you sure this post is aimed at me?

I am sure it was NOT aimed at you...My mistake...It was intended for NYer...

62 posted on 08/24/2007 11:17:30 PM PDT by Iscool (OK, I'm Back...Now what were your other two wishes???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus; NYer

> That has already been disproved by the passages from Revelation. Repeating an untruth will not make it true.

No, you provided a self-referential argument, not “disproof”. St-John-said-that-Jesus-sent-him-a-vision-that-said-to-write. That’s hearsay at best — and requires the reader to accept the Divine Inspiration of the book of Revelation. That is a long, long way from “proof”.

> No, it is not. It shows the even in the lifetimes of the Apostles, they were already viewing their own writings as God-breathed Scripture.

Which, again, is a very long way from conclusive proof, requiring the reader to pay heed to the advice given by our Lord and Master to St Thomas after the resurrection. It becomes a matter of Faith, not Proof.

> This is nothing more than a transparent attempt to prop up the “authority” of the RCC by knocking down Scripture a couple of rungs. It hasn’t worked in the past and it won’t work now.

The RCC’s “authority” is self-proclaimed. Most religions do that. Saying it doesn’t necessarily make it so.

The Roman Catholic Church is undeniably very old. But antiquity and lasting power do not equate to infallibility or authority. Were that the case, the Freemasons would arguably have an even better claim to infallibility and authority, as their heritage arguably traces back to the founding of King Solomon’s Temple, and even beyond that into the mists of Time when the pyramids were built...

That said, the truth of the argument above remains: Jesus did not himself personally write any of the Gospel. And, during his 3 1/2 year ministry on earth, he did not direct his disciples to do so either. Even post-resurrection thru to his ascent into heaven. Those are facts of Scripture.

What happened under Divine Inspiration is another matter.


63 posted on 08/24/2007 11:27:52 PM PDT by DieHard the Hunter (Is mise an ceann-cinnidh. Cha ghéill mi do dhuine. Fàg am bealach.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus
Okay, revise it: "Outside of a vision in the Book of Revelation, Jesus never ....."

Paul even specifically refers to a Gospel (Luke 10:7) passage as "Scripture".

1 Timothy 5:18 For the scripture saith, thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward.

Wouldn't the absence of quotation marks in the Koine Testament and Paul's ommission of the γαρ (which appears in Luke) make it a matter of conjecture whether Paul viewed the emphasized section as a quote from a written text and another example of what "Scripture says"? The και I think goes in favor of your argument. The textual guys would wonder if Paul was quoting Luke or some written version of "Q". I'm not sure which way that would cut, but Ihtink in favor of your side.

Certainly the "tradition" of where to put periods would cut your way. With different punctuation you get something like

Scripture says "You shall not muzzle... grain." Και (which you could render "Besides" or Also) the laborer deserves his pay.
where the second is not a quote but just a commonplace.

My arrogant opinion is that the distinctions and "proofs" won't be as crisp and clear as either side would like them to be.

64 posted on 08/25/2007 4:54:41 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: ladyinred
I accept Catholics as Christians, but until I started visiting this forum, I didn’t realize the feeling wasn’t mutual.

Mighty nice of you to accept us and all, but the recent statement from the Vatican makes as clear as any open mind would desire that Catholics do NOT think that they are the only Christians.

And there IS a problem in that part of any Christian groups doctrine is ecclesiology. Where they differ profoundly it seems unlikely that both will be right, just as if the "Catholic Bible" differs in content from the "Protestant Bible" it seems logically impossible that both Bibles would be just as good.

65 posted on 08/25/2007 5:02:03 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar
Does your Greek text have the "apparatus"? In mine (4th Ed. United Bible Societies/Deutsch Bibelgesellschaft) the page where that verse appears is about 3/5 textual notes and 2/5 actual text! And more than half the textual notes are given to vv 7,8.

I'd guess whoever monkeyed with it, did so a while back. I'm sure not going to try to dope out which MS has which version. Life is short.

66 posted on 08/25/2007 5:11:17 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: LiteKeeper
All in all a good article. I wolkd propose thqat my said drop the 33,000 or any other number and just stick with the scientifically precise "approximately a gazillion" instead.

I disagreed with the article in two places. One was the questioning of sola scriptura. as causally related to the fissiparation. I think our argument is based on "Sola scriptura" morphing naturally into "YOPIOS" which then leads to fissiparation.

The second was the comparison of the splits among protestants and the differences of opinion among Catholics. The matter in discussion is denominational splits. So differences of opinion within a group wouldn't seem to me to be relevant.

Mind, I read it quickly so I may have missed something.

67 posted on 08/25/2007 6:53:24 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NYer
I am aware of a church founded and headed by our Lord Jesus Christ, in which we are told that all scripture is God breathed (2Ti 3:16). I am aware of the Apostle Peter recognizing the letters of Paul as scripture (2 Peter 3:14-16). I am aware of a communion of saints, who have unity in their Brotherhood and Sisterhood in Jesus Christ. I am aware of teachings which tell us to do away with foolish talk and silly arguments.

About other things, may we be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.

God's peace and grace be with you all, but I will not respond any further in this thread.
68 posted on 08/25/2007 7:48:20 AM PDT by DragoonEnNoir
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg

***Does your Greek text have the “apparatus”? In mine (4th Ed. United Bible Societies/Deutsch Bibelgesellschaft) ******

I used this web site.

http://www.greeknewtestament.com/


69 posted on 08/25/2007 8:38:19 AM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar (Ever see WILLIS SHAW backwards in your rear view mirror? I have!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: DieHard the Hunter; NYer
"No, you provided a self-referential argument, not “disproof”. St-John-said-that-Jesus-sent-him-a-vision-that-said-to-write. That’s hearsay at best —"

NYer and I both accept the inspiration of the Scriptures. Any argument from the Scriptures could be called "self referential". Your argument has no meaning in this context.

If you won't accept the testimony of the Scriptures, then nothing I could provide for you could pass your test. What sort of evidence would you accept that Jesus commanded a disciple to "write"?


"That said, the truth of the argument above remains: Jesus did not himself personally write any of the Gospel. And, during his 3 1/2 year ministry o­n earth, he did not direct his disciples to do so either. Even post-resurrection thru to his ascent into heaven. Those are facts of Scripture."

We have seen that there IS proof that Jesus told a disciple to write down his words. That is the FACT.
70 posted on 08/25/2007 11:42:46 AM PDT by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar
10-4. Nice site.

You know what an "apparatus" is?

71 posted on 08/25/2007 12:41:41 PM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: narses; NYer; Northern Yankee; Borax Queen; saradippity
One of these days I'd like a protestant to show me where in the bible, or in the early Christian Church, it is justified and authorized to start other christian denominations outside the Catholic Church, established by Jesus Christ.

Until then, I'll stick to what has lasted for 2000 years, despite the continual heresies, attacks, modern reinventions, and attempted coups to undermine it.

72 posted on 08/25/2007 12:49:53 PM PDT by kstewskis ("Tolerance is what happens when one loses their principles"....Fr. A. Saenz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus; NYer

> What sort of evidence would you accept that Jesus commanded a disciple to “write”?

There is none. No evidence to say that He Himself Personally did so, and no evidence outside the self-referential claims of the writers themselves.

> If you won’t accept the testimony of the Scriptures, then nothing I could provide for you could pass your test.

That’s right. This is because you are trying to “prove” something with “fact” that can only be taken on “Faith”. Jesus had something to say about that, to the doubting St Thomas, as I recall.

> We have seen that there IS proof that Jesus told a disciple to write down his words. That is the FACT.

If it is Fact, then it can be proven. As we have seen, you cannot prove it. That leaves you in the position of having to accept these things as a matter of Faith, not Fact.


73 posted on 08/25/2007 2:03:31 PM PDT by DieHard the Hunter (Is mise an ceann-cinnidh. Cha ghéill mi do dhuine. Fàg am bealach.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg

***You know what an “apparatus” is?***

In terms of Greek language I don’t guess I know.


74 posted on 08/25/2007 2:57:07 PM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar (Ever see WILLIS SHAW backwards in your rear view mirror? I have!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar
I don't think it's a Greek thing so much as a textual thing. What the "apparatus" is is a list of alternate readings and the MS's those readings are in. There isn't one sort of objectively authoritative MS of the NT, so "they" have to do some fudging and guessing and picking and choosing. I remember there is a verse (but I couldn't say which) in the KJV Romans which doesn't appear in the RSV version evidently because "they" decided that it wasn't authentic.

So in the problem you mentioned, my footnotes mention that some texts say THIS and some say THAT and the notes then list a bunch of arcane abbreviations which refer to a key to the various MSs.

75 posted on 08/25/2007 3:09:36 PM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg

*** I remember there is a verse (but I couldn’t say which) in the KJV Romans which doesn’t appear in the RSV version evidently because “they” decided that it wasn’t authentic.***

Probably this one,
Rom 8:1 [There is] therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, *** who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.***


76 posted on 08/25/2007 5:51:28 PM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar (Ever see WILLIS SHAW backwards in your rear view mirror? I have!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg
Mighty nice of you to accept us and all,

Something tells me you don't actually mean this.

If Catholics don't think they are the only Christians, why do I keep reading posts that strongly imply such???

77 posted on 08/25/2007 7:03:07 PM PDT by ladyinred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg

Hello, please just ignore my post to you. I really don’t like getting into these kinds of disagreements with fellow believers. God Bless you.


78 posted on 08/25/2007 7:08:59 PM PDT by ladyinred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

glad y’all got popcorn - was the thread posted to provoke an argument or are you just hungry


79 posted on 08/25/2007 8:15:44 PM PDT by Revelation 911 (prov 30:33)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: LiteKeeper
Unfortunately this number may be close to reality from a numerical standpoint. Look at IRS Pub 78 for a complete listing of all nonprofit organizations who qualify for a tax deduction. The multi volumes of this pub , last count was five vols, are each over a thousand pages with about three hundred listings per page. You will go blind looking at these pubs for any length of time . A statistician once did a study by randomly selecting a given number of pages for an analysis of the types of organizations represented on the selected pages. Sure, secular entities are included but if you excise said secular types and concentrate on the Christian ones you will find many listed on most every page.
80 posted on 08/25/2007 8:40:11 PM PDT by bronx2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-111 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson